Attachment to Independent Case Review Report For CDRU # 7392 Case file # 95-233051. a

Material Examiner: Malone (RQ)

Remarks:

Case resulted in guilty plea. No testimony transcript..

CRM - 7217...

INDEPENDENT CASE'‘REVIEW REPORT

Independent Review conducted by:" Steve Robertson

Area(s) of Expertise: Hair and Fibers

Review commenced at: 1:45 PM (Time), 11/06/01 (Date) cee AN mgt See ee A Dee a File #: . 95-233051 wf

Laboratory #(s): 90924050 , a8

oO

TD — ee cD

. be .

Examiner(s) & Symbols Reviewed Not Reviewed Reviewed Not Reviewed RQ Xo “9 . a D ; MU o xo Go Oo a o : Go “oo

Materials Reviewed

Trial testimony transcript(s) of: not available

Testimony Date(s): , Pages:

Laboratory Report(s): Laboratory Number: 90924050 Date: Oct 19, 1979 Laboratory Number: ae : Date: Laboratory Number: Date: © Examiner Bench Notes of: RQ and unknown technician ~

Laboratory Number: 90924050

Page 1.. of 3

, Initials: yt 7

Was any other material reviewed? XO Yes _ 0 No If yes, please identify and/or-‘describe the material: | submitting agency letter dated 9-14-79 ’ 5 . : nes . a naan ane!

Results of Review

File #: 95-233051 Item or Specimen # Reviewed: Q1-Q5, Q9-Q14, Q16-Q18, K1-K4

Review of Laboratory Report(s) and Bench Notes:

Note: Numbered comments are required below or on additional pages for any “No” or “Unable to Determine” Responses

Did the examiner perform the appropriate tests in a scientifically acceptable manner, based on the © methods, protocols, and analytic techniques available at the time of the original examination(s)? OYes ONo XO Unable to Determine

2) Are the examination results set forth in the laboratory report(s) supported and adequately documented in ~ the bench.notes? OYes XONo QO Unable to Determine :

‘Review of Testimony:

; Note: Numbered comments are required below or on additional pages for any “No” or “Unable to Determine” Responses

XG Transcript not availabte. be. Sugnk 3) Testimony consistent with the laboratory report(s)? OYes oO No a Unable to Determine 4) Testimony consistent with the bench notes? O Yes ONo J Unable to Determine

5) Testimony within bounds of examiner's expertise? : OYes OQNo SG Unable to Determine

Page 2 of 3

Initials: SU 4

-| , ne Comments (Set forth by above question #, if applicable. Use “Additional Comments” Sheet, if needed) . ° ; * File#: _ 95-233051

#1: With microscopic hair comparison, one cannot determine from the notes that the examination was conducted in an appropriate manner. ;

, #2: Documentation is poor. The notes are not dated and are in pencil and not ink. Abbreviations are used to describe the microscopic characteristics of the hair. These abbreviations are difficult to interpret. There is no

documentation by the technician that hair was recovered from Q18 or other Q items as stated in the report.

ena rc

a

Review completed at: 2:15 PM (Time), 11/06/01 (Date) ~--—1 -- " Total time spent conducting review (to nearest 1/4 hour): —0.50br - 7 3

I hereby certify that I conducted this review in an independent, unbiased manner and that the results of my review are fully documented on this report consisting of a total 0 9 3 pages.

11/06/2001 f (Signature) (Date)

Page 3 of 3

mals: i ; ;